You just have to pick your side for whatever reasons you hold and back it as long as you share those reasons. Plenty of reasons to advocate anything whether or not the Russians support it. And you never know what it is they are supporting.

Like I said, the US has played too, and they also have supported some incongruous stuff. Either they were never quite as good and just got lucky, or the US is playing at a more meta level than I can yet see. As the US is the only truly revolutionary player left, I wonder that too.

It’s still a hard row to how getting anyone of left persuasion to realize these kinds of influence ops aren’t new. Old left don’t want to believe it of once-idols in then-radical movements. Young left are barely aware of what to them a set of prehistoric issues and motivations, or just assume everyone was fascist. To sum up a bit crudely. Terrorist groups, anti-nuclear, even the early green movement, among others. All a mix of the genuine and the paid for.

Good times.

On a certain level, America’s influence ops of that same era looked to have borne the greater fruit in 1989-91, and they are still working regionally. But now I wonder.

Tony Greer at The Scholar’s Stage had a good piece fall 2016 anticipating the year ahead, with a more sophisticated grip on Russian methods and goals than one sees from Louise Mensch. He stopped posting for a while after that. I was glad to see him return with a plausible explanation…